The world’s earliest extradition agreement was created in the year 1259 BCE by Ramessess ll of Egypt and Hittites. The agreement obligated both Ramessess and Hittites to send criminals and political figures back that have tried to flee to the other side. Extraditions have since grown to be bilateral agreements between nations in transferring criminals from one nation to another. Extradition is requested when an individual commits a crime within the country that is seeking extradition. The request of the extradition includes: the description of the individual, information on the case and the laws pertaining to the case. Each country must agree to extradite to each other for the process to take place. Canada only has fifty-one Canadian treaties with other countries. This Paper will argue that extradition laws in Canada are too slack due to Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the need to seek assurances that the death penalty will not be used.
Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms states each person has the "right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice” thus it is often used as a deterrent so that individuals do not have to be extradited to another country. In the following case, United States v. Burns, Glen Sebastian Burns and Atif Ahmad Rafay-two Canadian citizens-were wanted in Washington of the United States for the murder of Rafay’s parents and sister in 1994. In the subsequent year they were arrested in British Columbia and The United States started the extradition proceedings. The case made it to the Supreme Court of Canada and Burns and Ratify argued that their mobility rights under Section ...
... middle of paper ...
...mment on Canada v. Fischbacher." Gaming Law Review and Economics Jan.-Feb. 2010: 43+. Academic OneFile. Web. 23 Dec. 2013.
McClearn, Matthew. "THE LONG WAY HOME." Canadian Business. 15 Aug. 2005: 28. eLibrary. Web. 07 Dec. 2013.
Roach, Kent. September 11: Consequences for Canada. Montreal Etc.: McGill-Queen's UP, 2003. 100-01. Print.
Roach, Kent W. "Section 7 of the Charter and national security: rights protection and proportionality versus deference and status." Ottawa Law Review Winter 2011: 337+. General OneFile. Web. 28 Dec. 2013.
"Summary." Supreme Court of Canada. N.p., 03 Dec. 2012. Web. 29 Dec. 2013.
"Treaty on Extradition Between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America." MLA. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Dec. 2013.
Westcott, Kathryn, and Vanessa Barford. "10 Things about Extradition." BBC News. BBC, 26 June 2013. Web. 23 Dec. 2013
Maidment, M. (2009). When justice is a game: Unravelling wrongful convictions in Canada. Canada: Fernwood Publishing.
In Charles’ case, he was either going to be put in jail for the rest of his life in Canada or put on death row by the United States government. This resulted in a dispute between the Canadian and American government as Canada clearly knew the outcome that would come out of extraditing Charles. It could have been easy to simply send Charles to face justice in a country where he murdered and raped between 11 and 25 people. But the Canadian Government had to stand behind its core values included in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Blair, Annice. Law in Action: Understanding Canadian Law. Toronto, Ontario: Pearson Education Canada, 2003. Print.
Cole, D., & Dempsey, J. X. (2006). Terrorism and the constitution: sacrificing civil liberties in the name of national security. New York: New Press.
"Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms." Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. 2nd ed. 1982. N. pag. Print.
Search and seizure in Canada has evolved into the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as an important asset in the legal world. The case of R v. TSE sets an important example of how unreasonable search and seizure is in Canada. An important section that relates to this case is s. 8. The main concerns with this case are whether the police abuse their powers to search and seize Yat Fung Albert Tse, the fact that when the police did enter into the wiretap they did not have a warrant and also that it is a breach of privacy without concern.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was signed into law by Queen Elizabeth II April 17, 1982. Often referred to as the Charter, it affirms the rights and freedoms of Canadians in the Constitution of Canada. The Charter encompasses fundamental freedoms, democratic rights, mobility rights, legal rights, language rights and equality rights. The primary function of the Charter is to act as a regulatory check between Federal, Provincial and Territorial governments and the Canadian people. Being a successor of the Canadian Bill of Rights that was a federal statute, amendable by Parliament, the Charter is a more detailed and explicit constitutional document that has empowered the judiciary to render regulations and statutes at both the federal and provincial levels of government unconstitutional. Although the rights and freedoms of Canadians are guaranteed, Sections one and seven of the Charter permit the federal and provincial governments to limit the rights and freedoms enjoyed by Canadians. Section one of the Charter designated ‘Rights and freedoms in Canada’ states “The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” This section is frequently referred to and better known as the reasonable limits clause. The second rights and freedoms limiting section of the Charter, known as the ‘notwithstanding clause’ is Section thirty-three entitled ‘Exception where express declaration’ declares
In the contentious world of politics the actors at times find themselves at an impasse, unable to move forward between their conflicting visions. In these moments the courts may be asked to mediate between the different levels of government by providing constitutional or legislative advice. These scenarios can become perilous because since the courts must provide insight on issues that are political without stepping outside of its jurisdiction. Regardless of their dangers, however, I would argue that the reference instrument has proven to be a valuable tool in preventing political chaos. In the Patriation Reference and the Quebec Secession Reference the courts ++++---In order to illustrate the importance of reference cases in the Canadian system, despite their shortcomings, I will first look at the history of the advisory mechanism with a view to explain the roll of the courts. I will then look at the constitutional perspectives the courts took in several reference cases, especially the Patriation Reference and the Quebec Cessession Reference. In the next section I will explore the ways in which the courts opinions in these cases impacted Canadian federalism to determine the constitutionality of their advice. Finally I will explore the eventualities of a system without reference cases to demonstrate why they are so important. Attention will also be paid to the reference system of the United States in order to provide a comparative view. I will argue that in reference cases the Supreme Court takes on an important role as a mediator between political actors, however, the Court must act with caution as these are perilous grounds where suggestions can cross into political territory. – Indeed, political actors can abuse the system, >re...
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was enacted under the Pierre Trudeau government on April 17, 1982. According to Phillip Bryden, “With the entrenchment of the Charter into the Canadian Constitution, Canadians were not only given an explicit definition of their rights, but the courts were empowered to rule on the constitutionality of government legislation” (101). Prior to 1982, Canada’s central constitutional document was the British North America Act of 1867. According to Kallen, “The BNA Act (the Constitution Act, 1867) makes no explicit reference to human rights” (240). The adoption of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms significantly transformed the operation of Canada’s political system. Presently, Canadians define their needs and complaints in human rights terms. Bryden states, “More and more, interest groups and minorities are turning to the courts, rather than the usual political processes, to make their grievances heard” (101). Since it’s inception in 1982 the Charter has become a very debatable issue. A strong support for the Charter remains, but there also has been much criticism toward the Charter. Academic critics of the Charter such as Robert Martin believe that the Charter is doing more harm than good, and is essentially antidemocratic and UN-Canadian. I believe that Parliament’s involvement in implementing the Charter is antidemocratic, although, the Charter itself represents a democratic document. Parliament’s involvement in implementing the Charter is antidemocratic because the power of the executive is enhanced at the expense of Parliament, and the power of the judiciary is enhanced at the expense of elected officials, although, the notwithstanding clause continues to provide Parliament with a check on...
Anand, A. (2011). Combating terrorist financing: Is Canada’s legal regime effective? University of Toronto Law Journal, 61(1), 59-71. Retrieved from http://library.mtroyal.ca:2078/journals/university_of_toronto_law_journal/v061/61.1.anand.html
Whitlock, Craig and Dafna Linzer. “Italy Seeks Arrests of 13 in Alleged Rendition.” The Washington Post. 25 June 2005. Web. Nov. 25 2009.
Li, Peter S. Destination Canada: Immigration debates and issues. Don Mills, Ont.: Oxford UP, 2003.
"Declaration of the Rights of Man - 1789." The Avalon Project. Yale Law School, n.d. Web. 11 Nov. 2014.
Public Law: Text, Cases, and Materials by Andrew Le Sueur, Maurice Sunkin and Jo Murkens (Paperback - 12 Aug 2010) chapter 8 p 368-418
The Death Penalty, Human Rights and British Law Lords: Judicial Opinion on Delay of Execution in the Commonwealth Caribbean.Full Text Available By: Ghany, Hamid A.. International Journal of Human Rights, Summer2000, Vol. 4 Issue 2, p30, 14p